Marcia and Rick,
I can't find my source for the account of the notes having been
written in haste; obviously some evidence exists that contradicts it.
"Eliot's contention that the notes were added only because his poem
"was inconveniently short" has been disproved. We now know that Eliot
had the notes in mind before he began serious negotiations with his
eventual publisher, Liveright, and that he had finished composing them
several months before the poem first appeared in The Dial.(1) Eliot's
description of the notes as a "remarkable exposition of bogus
scholarship," however, should be taken more seriously. As Peter
Middleton stated so concisely almost a decade ago, "academic
interpretation of The Waste Land has gone straight along the paths
laid out by those footnotes" because "The Waste Land is a ready-made
academic poem with interpretations already included"
Sent from my iPod
On Mar 8, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Marcia Karp <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Ron Bush has the best account, I think, of the notes. Rainey sort
> of uses it, but isn't scrupulous in his use.
> Rickard A. Parker wrote:
>>> Eliot's slipshod notes were not the result of laziness but haste. He
>>> was asked to provide them at the last minute before publication.
>> I'm remembering that Eliot was thinking of the notes as early as
>> January or February of 1922. The Boni and Liveright book was
>> in December. I can't quickly find my copy of Lawrenre Rainey's
>> "The Price of Modernism: Publishing The Waste Land" to verify.
>> Rick Parker